Low bridge! (1 Viewer)

[DanielFord]

I had a weird one this morning whilst taking the van back to its parking spot. There had been an accident on the M27, so my sat nav was taking me around the traffic. I have programmed in all of the dimensions of the van, so I was a little alarmed when the sat nav told me to go down this road:
https://goo.gl/maps/zaBi6afVcE22

Notice the two signs read 10' 6" for imperial, and 3.1m for the metric.

Being of the age where we were taught metric at school, I did not go down this road, because the sticker on my windscreen says 3.2m. Later when I was in another traffic jam I looked at my screen sticker, and noticed that it also says 10' 6"! I obviously could sit on a computer and work out which was correct, but now I have had time.

The sticker in my windscreen is correct, 10' 6" is indeed 3.2m, so it begs the question, which of those signs is correct? 10cm is quite a large variance! Is it any wonder people hit bridges?

 

[Kevan]

Convertable Motorhome, that would be a first

 

[Tea Bag]

Hi.
Problem. Most bridge signs are/Were? correct in 1746. with about 4" added on for safety,however,the boys from the Black stuff,have ben re-tarmacing/stoneing up since then.
How to solve this problem. (But NOT in Rouen!!)
You can safely get under a bridge,that says it is 4" lower than your unit,How?. Take a run at it!
Tea Bag

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[TheBig1]

i thought 3.1m was 10ft 4in

300mm to the foot

 

[Lorryman100]

I admit that I am sad as I carry one of these as the detours can be miles long up here to avoid a slightly lower advertised bridge height than my MoHo.

http://www.uktoolcentre.co.uk/Shop/...oduct+Search&gclid=CIan452vktICFcm87Qod6vQJAA

 

[DanielFord]

i thought 3.1m was 10ft 4in

300mm to the foot

Exactly!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Kevan]

I admit that I am sad as I carry one of these as the detours can be miles long up here to avoid a slightly lower advertised bridge height than my MoHo.

http://www.uktoolcentre.co.uk/Shop/...oduct+Search&gclid=CIan452vktICFcm87Qod6vQJAA

If you need to use that, then you should not be doing it

 

[Gellyneck]

Come on guys! Think about it.
Just let your tyres down. You'll gain a good few inches (is it gain or lose?)

 

[PhilG]

i thought 3.1m was 10ft 4in

300mm to the foot

305mm to the foot.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Steve N Tracy]

The Sun arch at Romsey has taken quite a few victims.

 

[suavecarve]

For Crying out loud dont let the ladies see we are quibbling about 4-6 inches (or 100-150 mm)

 

[DanielFord]

The Sun arch at Romsey has taken quite a few victims.

As the brickwork around the curve gives testament to!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Jimbohorlicks]

According to my trusty tape measure 3.1m = 10ft 2" exactly

 

[TheBig1]

my father-in-law once drove for saturn gas, long since swallowed up by calor. anyway he was driving a lorry full of cylinders, delivering to various outlets around the new forest. he drove under one such bridge and there was a loud bang followed by a hissing sound. on investigating he had hit the bridge with a huge propane bottle and ripped off the brass valve

 

[GWAYGWAY]

i thought 3.1m was 10ft 4in

300mm to the foot

That is the front but the solar panels on the back and the hatches are a bit higher, especially with the airbags pumped up JUST a little. = expensive noise above you, at least you would not damage the bridge like the skip lorries do around here.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GWAYGWAY]

Come on guys! Think about it.
Just let your tyres down. You'll gain a good few inches (is it gain or lose?)

make the missus sit in the back end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

 

[Gellyneck]

make the missus sit in the back end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?

Don't think so. That'll make it nose up which will whack the bridge. Better if she's perched on the bonnet, foot flat on the floor and hope the wedge manages to get through before the speed comes off!

 

[RogerThat]

The sticker in my windscreen is correct, 10' 6" is indeed 3.2m, so it begs the question, which of those signs is correct? 10cm is quite a large variance! Is it any wonder people hit bridges?

Never mind what the sticker says, what does the tape measure say when you measure the motorhome?

I'd then adjust the sticker accordingly

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[magicsurfbus]

Yesterday we were driving down a narrow lane in our car, went under a 3.6m bridge and found ourselves at the end of a queue of traffic waiting for an artic to reverse back up the lane away from the bridge.

Interestingly (and I hadn't thought of this before) he was reversing up the left (ie our) side of the lane, and not up the side he'd come down, which I'm sure would be most drivers' first instinct.

Makes a lot of sense when you think about it, so I've made a mental note for if we ever have to do it in the MH.

 

[Gellyneck]

Do you think I should try it?

If not, it's a heck of a reversing manoeuvre.

 

[GWAYGWAY]

I think I went up picture two in the Chausson, and had to back up when builder in his transit pick up came down the hill. Well it wasn't quite that bad but very close. Symonds Yat on the Wye. I had to back up as he wasn't going to ( couldn't) but I couldn't see behind , he could. 60 yards to a driveway.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[busby]

I had a weird one this morning whilst taking the van back to its parking spot. There had been an accident on the M27, so my sat nav was taking me around the traffic. I have programmed in all of the dimensions of the van, so I was a little alarmed when the sat nav told me to go down this road:
https://goo.gl/maps/zaBi6afVcE22

Notice the two signs read 10' 6" for imperial, and 3.1m for the metric.

Being of the age where we were taught metric at school, I did not go down this road, because the sticker on my windscreen says 3.2m. Later when I was in another traffic jam I looked at my screen sticker, and noticed that it also says 10' 6"! I obviously could sit on a computer and work out which was correct, but now I have had time.

The sticker in my windscreen is correct, 10' 6" is indeed 3.2m, so it begs the question, which of those signs is correct? 10cm is quite a large variance! Is it any wonder people hit bridges?

Well if my van was 3.1 and the bridge said 3.2 i would be crawling under it with someone watching for me.,,they could have tarmac the road since signs were erected,,BUSBY.

 

[tonyidle]

Exactly!

300mm = 11.81"

 

[DAVWOD]

Hmm well size does Matter

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Glandwr]

Not TT by any chance. I have the truck pro, feed in the dimensions and brilliant in choosing a route or if you ask for an alternative. BUT if you diverge from that route the dimension constraints you programmed seem totally irrelevant. It just seems to want you to get back onto the chosen route. Down back alleys or low bridges, it seems to panic.

Dick

 

[DanielFord]

Not TT by any chance. I have the truck pro, feed in the dimensions and brilliant in choosing a route or if you ask for an alternative. BUT if you diverge from that route the dimension constraints you programmed seem totally irrelevant. It just seems to want you to get back onto the chosen route. Down back alleys or low bridges, it seems to panic.

Dick

'Twas indeed the TT live. I don't think I can blame the Sat Nav, when I programmed the dimensions, I did it in imperial, since it is set to miles and yards for distance. So the database will have that bridge as 10' 6", and so the route was correct.
I've never had the 'get back on route' issue. It seems really good when there is a snarl up, and they have fixed the issue where when you lose mobile signal, it always used to re-route back to the route with traffic on it. Now, when the mobile signal goes, it holds the stored route.

Hypothetical scenario, if the metric sign is correct, but someone driving a 10' 6" van, who reads the sign, and then crashes into the bridge. Would the council/highways agency be liable for the loss? I only ask, because if one hits a bridge and you have ignored a height restriction, then you are liable for damage to the bridge!

 

[KeithChesterfield]

Whoops .....

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Lorryman100]

If you need to use that, then you should not be doing it

How so?? In my last job I drove car transporters a Euro Lohr draw bar to be exact, up to 12 cars on 3 adjustable decks. No set height as dependent on model/number of cars carried. I needed an exact height of the load to know what height bridge I could go under when out delivering to garages which where mostly in towns and cities and most of them are under 16ft 6 inches. The upside to checking the vehicle height was that you could also check the bridge height and I found they were mostly correct with the error being that the sign would display a lower bridge height than what it actually was so naturally it comes along with me in the Moho, experience teaches valuable lessons as I never hit a bridge or scraped a car roof, my reply to your comment is everyone is entitled to their opinion though I don't need to agree with it.

Stock picture of transporter class:

 

[EX51SSS]

i thought 3.1m was 10ft 4in

300mm to the foot

Not being pedantic but here's the exact figure

 

[PeteH]

i thought 3.1m was 10ft 4in

300mm to the foot

Pedantry (and the Engineer in my DNA) would dictate that it is 304.8mm per ft.. that 4.8mm could be critical in some situations.. (3.1M= 10.17060367454068 ft) 10ft.2-3/64" in old money. (sorry EX51SSS I can`t help it, but Matron will be round with my "meds" soon.)

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}